Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/5] drm/i915/perf: fix gen7_append_oa_reports comment

2017-01-25 Thread Matthew Auld 
On 24 January 2017 at 01:25, Robert Bragg  wrote:
> If I'm going to complain about a back-to-front convention then the least
> I can do is not muddle the comment up too.
>
> Signed-off-by: Robert Bragg 
Reviewed-by: Matthew Auld 
___
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/5] drm/i915/perf: fix gen7_append_oa_reports comment

2017-01-23 Thread Robert Bragg 
If I'm going to complain about a back-to-front convention then the least
I can do is not muddle the comment up too.

Signed-off-by: Robert Bragg 
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_perf.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_perf.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_perf.c
index a1b7eec58be2..b0eec762b9b4 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_perf.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_perf.c
@@ -431,7 +431,7 @@ static int append_oa_sample(struct i915_perf_stream *stream,
  * userspace.
  *
  * Note: reports are consumed from the head, and appended to the
- * tail, so the head chases the tail?... If you think that's mad
+ * tail, so the tail chases the head?... If you think that's mad
  * and back-to-front you're not alone, but this follows the
  * Gen PRM naming convention.
  *
-- 
2.11.0

___
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx